Georgian House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

Good: This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

We found there was a positive approach to ensuring continuous development of the service. There was a range of policies and procedures to guide staff on what was expected of them in their roles and for staff and people to provide feedback to help on the development of the service.

The registered manager told us, “Team meetings are held monthly, it’s a time to share ideas, everyone is listened to, willing to always try new things , trial and error and learn from things when they don’t work out. Empowering staff like we do means they feel listened to and motivated.”

The provider focuses on person centred care, all staff received training in person centred care, and people were supported by a keyworker. Keyworkers work alongside people to ensure all their needs were met.

People and their relatives were positive about the culture of the service. They told us the communication between them and leaders was good and told us they were happy with the staff and the overall service.

There was an activity coordinator in place who involved people in the planning of activities for the week based on what people liked. A relative told us, “They do jigsaws, and they had two ladies who came in yesterday and did a music type concert. [Relative] does not interact much, but afterwards [relative] said it was fantastic. They have an exercise lady who comes round with a ball which is thrown around to music. She also does quizzes with them as well. They also have a few singers who come in as well. Quite often, [care worker] will text me and say that they are in the park, and we will go and meet them there.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. The managers had a clear commitment to providing person centred care and valuing people who lived at the home and the staff team. Staff spoke highly of the registered manager. Comments included, “All is well organised and maintenance here is a good thing. I’m so happy here, the team are very helpful, also the manager. Yes I get supervision. It’s every 6 months or so and a yearly review in September or August.”

Relatives gave positive feedback about the service and leaders. A family member told us “Overall, I think this place is run excellently well. I have no doubt that I would place this one as the best in west London and arguably the best in London. The manager is very approachable and understanding, and actually very responsible.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they were aware of the term ‘freedom to speak up’ A member of staff told us, “Yes, we hear about this at team meeting and during training, we also have a policy we can look at. You will see signs around the house too.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff received regular training in the Equality Act 2010 and Human Rights legislation. The management team provided effective and proactive ways to engage with and involve staff.

Staff told us they felt supported and were treated fairly. A staff member told us, “We are treated very well, we all have roles I think called champions, if we have concerns we discuss with [manager]. They are helpful to me with rota etc, fairness.”

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider had various systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. Staff worked closely with other agencies to ensure people's needs were met. Staff worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. For example, the home had regular visits from the GP, the community nurse, and social workers.

The provider had a collaboration with Mayhew, the Animal Welfare charity, and host regular pet therapy visits from ‘Dolly’ a Mayhew dog. The service partners locally to provide work placements for students, supporting skill development and intergenerational engagement. A Level 3 art students were working on mural artwork within the home, further enhancing the environment and showcasing community collaboration.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The registered manager encouraged a culture of continuous improvement by providing oversight of the overall governance of the home. This meant areas of improvement were easily identified and the lessons learned process followed.

The provider worked with an independent external agency to learn areas for improvement with regulation compliance and service delivery. The provider’s collaboration with local colleges also demonstrated the provider’s commitment to fostering a workforce in health and social care.

The provider had appointed specialist leads in key areas, for example Infection Prevention and Control, Health and Safety, Nutrition and Hydration, Safeguarding, to drive continuous improvement through early issue identification, proactive interventions and evaluation of outcomes.